• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

The Chamax: Gotta Love To Hate 'Em!

Or, taking a page from Hans, the Darrians were experimenting with the bugs, and accidentally mutated them into an unstoppable force...


Robject,

Hans' suggestion involves the pre-Maghiz Darrians attempting a technological uplift of the Chamax sophonts in the same manner they were technologically uplifted by the Itzin Fleet. There isn't a geneering component as there would be in David Brin's use of the term "uplift".

Besides, the Chamax "bugs" had a natural predator.


Regards,
Bill
 
Hans' suggestion involves the pre-Maghiz Darrians attempting a technological uplift of the Chamax sophonts in the same manner they were technologically uplifted by the Itzin Fleet.
Yes, indeed. I just wanted an explanation why the Darrians explored all these worlds and were yet so slow to extend them a helping hand. There's nothing like an early effort blowing up in your face to take the shine off a do-gooder's enthusiasm.

The Chamaxi need not come into it at all, but I just thought they'd fit.They're fairly close to Darrian and all we know about them is that they were there.


Hans
 
Robject,

Hans' suggestion involves the pre-Maghiz Darrians attempting a technological uplift of the Chamax sophonts in the same manner they were technologically uplifted by the Itzin Fleet. There isn't a geneering component as there would be in David Brin's use of the term "uplift".

Besides, the Chamax "bugs" had a natural predator.


Regards,
Bill

I suppose a failed geneering attempt is less likely than the inconvenient truth-style ecological imbalance caused by Chamaxi pesticides, or whatever it was that they used to kill those other things off.
 
Kafak,

If not the entire homeworld, at least the "small continent" where the Chamax bugs originated.

Remember how the "plague" was unleashed? The Chamax sophonts were colonizing the continent and decided to eradicate a burrowing carnivore species whose members becoming quite a nuisance. It turned out that the eradicated carnivore species was the environmental check that kept the Chamax bugs in balance.

Imagine what kind of an animal can shrug off acid attacks from aroused Chamax hunters as it digs up and devours the Chamax maternal...

Maybe Jon Blazer will take a whack at it for his next Creatures of Distant Worlds subscription?


Regards,
Bill

kafka, Whipsnade; you know, I threw some pretty nasty things at my gaming group; ED-209 knock-offs from Robocop, a superenhanced bio/genetically engineered super-soldier, Vargr Corsairs with psionics, insurgents with heavy beam artillery on a vaccum world, force them to fly down a spinal gun barrel at full speed during its warmup sequence, and of course the Chamax, but ya'll bring up a scary thought and notion. What kind of critter can not only laugh off the Chamax, but actually preys on them?
 
It's reasonable to assume, for game purposes, that the bugs and the sophonts on Chamax followed the same basic physical pattern, while still being significantly different... as Bill mentioned.

robject, Whipsnade; I totally forgot about that. But that does ring true with my memory.
 
No more Chamax thoughts?

There are several things I like about the Chamax and that I think add drama to a Traveller game:

1. Easy for the Referee to run -- 8+ hits, they explode. Less than that, no effect. So you can throw hordes at PCs easily.

2. Rather hard to take down with standard slugthrowers (Cloth armor) unless you have a very high weapon skill. This offers a great justification for why low tech locals need the help of a well equipped and highly trained group of adventurers.

3. No sane human being likes giant spiders. (Oh and you can buy a bag of 100 plastic spiders from party favor shops for abour $10 that are just the right size for 25/28mm minis).

4. Because they burst when destroyed, they exact a penalty on the players even in defeat. This leads to player resentment and downright bitterness when they fight Chamax. Player grudges are good for drama.

5. No complexity, angst or whingeing about motives. They are vicious nasty bugs who want to kill you.
 
Last edited:
Ty,

I really loved the "all or nothing" nature of damage for the Chamax. Inflict 7 hits on one of the damn things for 10 rounds running and it keeps coming. Get 8 hits in one round and watch out for the splatter.

When my players used the sandcaster round against the infestation aboard the Shaarin Challenger, I really played up the acid splatter angle.


Regards,
Bill
 
Last edited:
If you ever wanted an opportunity to let the players get all their Christmas wishes granted this would be a good chance to let them have some battle dress and FGMP's.

After the battle was over the gear would be mostly slag but they probably wouldn't realize it until after the first bug went pop all over the shiny toys.
 
Does battledress melt in acid?

Says in the adventure that Chamax acid breaches battledress by 100 hits. Cloth or ablat by 50, vacc suits by 25, and anything else by 10. The damage is cumulative and the wearer takes no damage form the acid until it is breached.

So yeah, the stuff is the ultimate universal solvent and eats through battledress.

It also says arouse hunters really pour on the acid to get at food behind barriers so they do 6D6 damage each round to bulkhead and interior walls. Bulkheads have 1000 points, but interior walls only have 100.
 
Wow. That's some PH level. :eek:

But, back to the question at hand, what kind of creature would prey on that Chamax?
 
But, back to the question at hand, what kind of creature would prey on that Chamax?


BG,

It's either big, fast, and digs well or it's several things that are big, fast, and dig well. Consider the following suppositions:

- The story in DA5 somewhat implies a solitary creature, but I always liked the idea of hunting pairs with one digging towards the maternal as the other deals with the aroused Chamax hunters.

- Nothing evolves in a vacuum, evolution is an arms race of sorts. This means the Chamax bug's "acid" must have evolved in conjunction with something else and that something else being a neutralizing agent, a resistant substance, or a mixture of both. I'll go with a mixture, the carnivores are somewhat resistant to the acid and can produce a neutralizing agent.

- The Chamax bugs are Great Dane sized, so I figured the Chamax carnivores would be roughly grizzly bear sized. They'd be multi-legged too, just as the Chamax sophonts and bugs are, because that's the body plan that won out early on in the planet's evolutionary history.

- The Chamax carnivores would have a radio sense, just as most Chamax animals did according to DA5. This RF sense may have caused to their attraction the Chamax sophonts underground structures, the carnivores were picking up stray RF signals from the sophonts electrical equipment.

So, my suppositions give us:

- An eight legged "beetle" the size of a grizzly bear with an armored carapace. The creature's "head", really just a feeding cluster similar to the bugs', is normally recessed beneath the carapace and can be extended for feeding or to spew an acid neutralizing agent. The creature's forelegs are evolved for digging much like a wolverine or mole. The carapace material is somewhat resistant to the Chamax bugs' acid and is ablative. The carapace material is shed in sheets once acid contacts it.

- The Chamax carnivores hunt in reproductive pairs. A pair take time to slow triangulate on a Chamax bug maternal's position not only noting the location but the depth of the maternal's burrow. A carnivore pair will spend days patiently determining a burrow's location and depth while also scouting the terrain around the burrow.

- While scouting for the maternal's burrow, the carnivores will avoid questing bug hunters of at all possible. There are even indications that the carnivores can jam a bug hunter's radio signals when in close range. Hunting pairs of carnivores have been known to stalk and destroy individual bug hunters when their movements are blocked. Carnivores have also been observed destroying lone hunters in what only can be surmised is an effort to reduce the number of defenders a maternal may have.

- Once the burrow is located, the hunting pair will move rapidly to a point where they can dig for it. They will not usually attempt to enlarge the Chamax bugs' own access tunnels to the burrow but will dig their own tunnel instead. As one carnivore digs, the other stand watch for aroused hunters. This "overwatch" hunter aggressively destroys the bug hunters that first approach even to the point of rolling on them. As the numbers of hunters increase, the digging carnivore will still find it necessary to interrupt digging and defend itself occasionally. Both hunters also "sweat" an agent that partially neutralizes the bugs' acid and will regurgitate the same on one another.

- If a defense is too vigorous or the chosen tunnel route to difficult for digging, the carnivores will abandon their attempt. They usually will return later either after destroying more solitary hunters or scouting another route to dig.

- When a carnivore breaks into the bug maternal's burrow, it will partially curl up and thrash violently about to crush or otherwise disable the "palace guard" present in the small chamber. Once the guard is dispatched, the carnivore collapses the access tunnel dug by the bugs and begins to feed. Both hunters will take turns feeding and standing "overwatch" near the access tunnel they dug.

- After rapidly devouring, but not digesting, most of the maternal's 5000kg bulk, the carnivores withdraw from the area and return to their own burrow which could be kilometers distant. There they'll enter a more quiescent state until they need to feed again.

How's that? Nasty enough? Having a pair of hungry 500kg armored beetles dig their way into your house because they "heard" your radio would be excuse enough for poisoning them off the face of the planet, don't you think?


Regards,
Bill
 
Last edited:
Bill; wow.

I am humbled by your superior immagination :) All praise Whipsnade. Zooligical visionary and sci-fi genius.

Seriously, good stuff. More later... off to work.
 
The carnivore merely has to have evolved, possibly in response to the acid defense of the Chamax, a protective chitin layer of the same material described in the adventure as forming the protective membranes in the Chamax. The adventure says its a material which degrades quickly in the air, but is the only material which the players could wear that would prevent the acid from hurting them at all.

So, something akin to this could be a component of the beetle's chitinous exoskeleton, or at least lining it's own GI tract with a secretion for outer protection. Nature being conservative I would say just having the same material making up at least the outer shell of the exoskeleton would be most likely.

This also means the beetles would be especially vulnerable during times of molting and would provide the impetus for pair bonding like Whipsnade describes beyond just the need for hunting. While one is molting and vulnerable...say...the female grows faster than the male to get to egg-laying mass faster....the other can help protect it from Chamax, who might also prey on the beetle's eggs and on the beetles themselves when they are softshelled.

As for the reason why the ccolonists wiped out the beetles...maybe they just liked the colonists crops and herd animals better than the Chamax? And since they were the only large predator on the planet, and probably not in huge numbers given the ususal predator/prey ratio, they were hunted down as nuisances like has happened elsewhere in time and space.
 
How's that? Nasty enough? Having a pair of hungry 500kg armored beetles dig their way into your house because they "heard" your radio would be excuse enough for poisoning them off the face of the planet, don't you think?

<golf clap>

Bravo, sir.

I'll be stealing this if you don't mind...
 
I'll be stealing this if you don't mind...


Ty,

Please do!

Anything I post anywhere is up for grabs.

Hmm... maybe I should put that stuff in CT animal terms with a little descriptive text appended. Upload the results here in the File Library and send off a copy to Jeff Zeitlin too.


Regards,
Bill
 
Sabredog,

Very good ideas! Especially the molting bits.

A word about exoskeletons though. First, the Chamax bugs are described as "pseudocrustaceans" and my silly Chamax carnivores are "beetle-like". No chitin and no exoskeletons for each primarily because exoskeletons won't work in creatures that big.

Instead I was picturing ablative plates along the lines of the ankylosaurus, armadillo, or glyptodon.


Regards,
Bill
 
Back
Top